Difference between revisions of "User talk:TerryH"

Revision as of 20:39, June 15, 2008

Talk to me! Am I right? Wrong? Any suggestions? --TerryH 18:24, 5 March 2007 (EST)

• Archive 1
• Archive 2
• Archive 3

Administrative Office

The door is always open. Please place questions, suggestions, complaints, et cetera, here.--TerryH^Talk 13:50, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

I think you're right and glad you ain't left. --Ed Poor 15:56, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Templates

Terry,

Instead of typing out <nowiki>{{Essay}}</nowiki>, you can instead type {{tl|Essay}}. This is less effort and produces a similar result, except that it includes a link to the template: {{Essay}}.

Philip J. Rayment 23:18, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

66.212.16.194

I may be wrong about this, and this may be encyclopedia policy, but I noticed you banned User:66.212.16.194 for an infinite period of time. It seems somewhat illogical to ban an IP address infinitely, because somebody else may end up with that IP and be unable to create an account.--Tmcfulton 20:37, 13 November 2007 (EST)

That's not how IP addresses work. A little probabilistic math ought to convince anyone that the hazard you describe is a virtual non-issue.--TerryH^Talk 20:46, 13 November 2007 (EST)

You're correct, I guess. I was thinking of the way they do it on Wikipedia, but I guess Conservapedia isn't popular enough for this to be an issue.--Tmcfulton 20:50, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Jesse MacBeth

The phony soldier himself. All we need is a pic. Karajou 06:04, 25 December 2007 (EST)

Reply

Capitalism essentially becomes the practice of making the rich richer and the poor poorer. I do not see why the failure of one or two states that pretended to be communist so they could garner the support of the masses makes capitalism any less abhorrent. And Terry, spouting the occasional occasional fragment of fortune-cookie wisdom does not improve your argument, nor does it compensate for the unequivocally unamicable tone of your response. I mean no offense, I simply didn't expect to be greeted with such open hostility in response to what was intended as a partially fatuous comment. --AngryCommunist 23:03, 4 January 2008 (EST)

You are too late. My opinion of Communism is obviously widely shared. And if it is "unamicable" to say that Communism is bad, then you will see in me the least amicable person you are likely ever to meet on the Internet. Let that suffice.--TerryH^Talk 07:27, 5 January 2008 (EST)

Examples of Bias in Wikipedia

I know I'm new here and I haven't made many edits, but could you please give me an explanation for reverting my edit to Examples of Bias in Wikipedia? I didn't delete that example just because I felt like it. One of the sources in the Wikipedia article really does mention something about extrapolation, making our allegation false. I'm not trying to censor anything, I just don't want this site filled with the same kind of lies and inaccuracies that pervade Wikipedia. Best, Gillespie 22:36, 9 January 2008 (EST)

Explain what? Do you deny it?

Do you deny that Wikipedia is six times more liberal than is the American public?

In fact, Jimbo Wales is proud of that statistic. Proud! He seems to think that we "Yanks" are too busy playing cowboys and Indians to be truly enlightened.

If you are prepared to show that that entry is in error--show me. Do it on the Talk page of the article in question, so that everybody who takes as active an interest as I do, will see it as well.--TerryH^Talk 23:29, 9 January 2008 (EST)

Schlafly

You objected to speculation, I removed it. Now you are censoring my opinion in violation of the Conservapedia Commandments. MatthewHopkins 11:35, 2 February 2008 (EST)

Help!

Hey Terry - I hate to have to ask - but I saw that your online and you had just done a template a bit ago, so I assume you're good with templates. Would you mind helping me out on Template:USState? I can't get it to work properly - I think the problem is {{!-}}. Thanks--IDuan 16:38, 9 February 2008 (EST)

Oh btw - see the talk page for the visual on the problem--IDuan 16:39, 9 February 2008 (EST)

Oh hey - I figured it out! It was just a weird thing with the spacing - I'll fix it now--IDuan 16:49, 9 February 2008 (EST)

Well now the only problem is that there's a ton of spaces under "capital" if the parameters aren't filled in - but hopefully I can figure out how to fix this - thanks for your help--IDuan 16:52, 9 February 2008 (EST)

CreationWiki

Is there something wrong with CreationWiki right now? That seems to happen a lot; it's been going on for several weeks in a row now. I try to access the site and it always tells me "Internet Explorer Cannot display the webpage". I figured you'd know something since you're an admin, please help me out here Scorpion^{Vote for Pedro} 09:52, 14 February 2008 (EST)

Thanks! I was getting kind of worried there. I Pray it's up again soon. Scorpion^{Vote for Pedro} 21:18, 14 February 2008 (EST)

I'm hearing a lot of crap about the God of the OT being infanticidal. How should I respond? Scorpion^{Vote for Pedro} 10:00, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Yeah, they're talking about God's directives for the Israelites' enemies. "Why would God command them to kill the babies too?" (God tells them to kill the men, women and children and animals) Scorpion^{Vote for Pedro} 10:12, 16 February 2008 (EST)

For questions such as this, a good site is http://www.tektonics.org. You can search for keywords (as you can on many sites), or you can look up particular verses. With a quick look I found this page that touches on your question. I also found another page that pointed to a different site with this article, which I haven't read, but I think might be quite useful to you. With a better search, you might be able to find more. Philip J. Rayment 17:24, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Headline text

Terry, it's a lot quicker to go look at my contributions, hit the "rollback" button, then hit "back" on your browser and go up the list. By the way, ask Andy if he got my email yet! --HelpfultipsforTerryH 12:00, 15 February 2008 (EST)

Hai

Terry,

Those last two ethereal apparitions of vandals were not me, but I totally endorse what they did. Seems as though I have some admirers!

In regards to the second vandal's tips, it's sound advice. I'd feel sorry for you (that's a lie - maybe a small bit of pity, of definitely not sorry) if one of those WillyOnWheels vandals from last year showed up when you were the only sysop on patrol. Advice is advice, take it from where you can. But, in your defense, it is hard to teach an old dog dinosaur new tricks.

Also, consider archiving those two pages.

You should be looking forward to the next RDubya project - It's an article which systematically compares Conservapedia to your very own definition of extremism! I can't wait for it to be the shining gem of the internet.

By the way, please tell Andy to check his email - I have an important message waiting for him.

Please feel free to email me, the link on my deleted userpage should still be active.

Regards, -Hojimachong

CreationWiki

Re-install MediaWiki. I use PHP5 on my Mac with Apache2 to run the software for my personal use, and have never had a problem. I understand the base is heavily hacked, but that's life. Alternatively, you might want to consider replacing all of the include directives with include_once directives. --MakeTomorrow 10:17, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Io

Wow, Terry, amazing job!--IDuan 22:53, 18 February 2008 (EST)

Comment

In my short time here I've noticed two blocks, one with an accompanying IP block. I understand that IP blocks are good site policy for persistent vandals, but absent a showing that the targeted vandal is in fact a persistent, repeat offender, is there any reason to block permanently, other than to suppress dissent? Isn't it conceivable that you just blocked a public computer, or a public WiFi net, meaning now legitimate users can't visit? Seems to me like a poor compromise between security and freedom.-PhoenixWright 14:07, 3 March 2008 (EST)

Hmmm, I appreciate your reasons, although I continue to think they're overbroad. I guess we disagree, but you're free to run your own site (into the ground...?). Further, I did not appreciate the threatening tone, here. In fact, I think it's counterproductive. I was not aware that wikis were autocracies. My experience at (dare I say it? - Wikipedia) was different. I see you're different from them, though, in many significant ways, this not the least. Cheers nonetheless.-PhoenixWright 22:19, 3 March 2008 (EST)

The horror...

Hey, are you online? Could you please block ZebraSofa? I think I'm the only one who noticed his recent vandalism rampage. He seems to have sort of cooled down, but he could just be regrouping on the savannah. Thanks.Jellyfish 12:27, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

I second to that, look at Recent Page. Someone stop the idiot that living his own shell

Edit- By the way, good job for defense, Jellyfish. --TagoPagdaluhong 12:33, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

I got him. Thanks again Jellyfish. HelpJazz 12:44, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Oops

(blush) Philip J. Rayment 11:20, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

300.2 million > 3.2 million [1] --Ed Poor ^Talk 22:22, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Opinion requested

Could you please weigh in on the discussion here? We're looking for more opinions and hope to arrive at some sort of style definition. Thanks. Jinkas 19:42, 25 April 2008 (EDT)

bamboozled

Why don't you think Fox News is a major media organization? --DeanSa 17:38, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

The edit isn't about size - it is about liberal bias. 10px Fox (talk|contribs) 17:39, 3 May 2008 (EDT)

quick note

I replied to your planet suggestion and would be most happy to review the material and provide any input that I think I would be beneficial. I also sent you an important email. I am hoping to get things rolling as soon as possible and would appreciate your input in regards to my proposal. Conservative 15:27, 15 May 2008 (EDT)

Regarding removal of my articles

Is there any person I can contact regarding removing my articles? I see you reverted my deletion notices. Regards. LChriosa 10:22, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

1. No need to spam the wiki like this. You are heard.
2. They are not "your" articles; you donated them without any strings attached.
3. I deleted a couple already. Your article on Machiavellianism was worthless drivel. I can't believe a professor would use such material as course notes.
4. If (by some awkward chance) you are really a professor, email me your credentials and we can talk by phone. --Ed Poor ^Talk 11:02, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

They weren't course notes; they were introductory articles. Quite a difference. I have nothing to prove to you, I don't care if you think I am a professor or not (I amn't by they way, I was a lecturer who taught in England and Ireland for many years, and never attained the title of 'professor') and am not going to Email you and am most certainly not going to let a random person on the internet ring me. What aspect of the Machiavelli article didn't you like? Was it above you? LChriosa 11:39, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

Redheads

Why does it need to be deleted? Sure, the first article I posted was intended to be sarcastic (not against Conservapedia, but against the cruel views with which Redheads are looked upon in England (a trend that stems from bigotry against the Scots, Irish, and Scandinavians).

This has manifested itself in the following forms:

-The Chapman family in Newcastle was forced to move MULTIPLE TIMES due to taunts directed to both parents and children

-We have been beaten up, and one man was stabbed in an alley

-Skinheads are organizing against us

-A waitress was harassed on multiple occasions

-Some of us (though not me, personally) are brought to indignation upon hearing the word "ginger", which isn't much when compared to things like "Firecrotch"

-Countless men, women, and children have been taunted, often resulting in suicide attempts

-Over here in Texas, I, along with a few people I know, have also been the target of obsceneties

-This issue has gained the attention of the press from Austin to Aberdeen, along with being the focal topic of an episode of Southpark, along with countless British media and recent literature.

(pardon my bad spelling; I'm only 16)

My second post sought to explain this. It did not have any liberal bias- only pro-ginger bias (my own). It does not concern conservatism or liberalism*. Besides, I thought this is the place to be biased... isn't it?

*Liberalism traditionally refers to free-market capitalism and relaxed social restrictions similar to Libertarianism. Only in recent years has it been misconstrued to refer to left-wing politics.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by GLA (talk)

Vaccines

Why did you revert my edits? The article that's cited as a source explicitly states that it has not been conclusively proven that Gardasil caused or was even implicated in those deaths. -- Aaronp

Principal's Resignation?

Terry,

Thought you might be interested in this story.

http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/575/story/458733.html

--Benp 22:49, 22 May 2008 (EDT)

Aggrieved's Talk Page Debate

Terry, you came to my Talk page and demanded that I "had better: 1) Provide a citation for your allegation that a significant proportion of Guantanamo detainees have turned out to be innocent of the war crimes imputed to them; 2) Retract your last comment and apologize to me; and 3) Prepare to face blockage for contempt of the administration."

My response:

1) - Multiple citations provided. It is duly noted you never provided a single citation to back up your own false claim; 2) - Not a chance; 3) - No problem. This dialog will be in the record and your willingness to disregard fact, remain uninformed about current affairs, and aggressively police your own mistruths will be duly noted. Martyrdom in the name of truth can be my legacy.

In response to your failure to prove your case, and my success in proving mine, I now demand you: 1. Withdraw your claim on Main:Talk Page that "to a man, every one of those released detainess has turned up doing exactly the same thing again", publicly. 2. Apologize to me, publicly, for your aggressive tone and ill-informed opinion.

Thank you. Aggrieved 21:04, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Contempt

I'd like to take this opportunity to express my complete and unreserved contempt for your recent behaviour. You backed yourself into a corner and are now lashing out at those who had the temerity to point out as much. It's OK to make mistakes. All of this could have been avoided with a simple "Actually, that was a bit of sweeping statement. What I meant to say was..." Your name is TerryH, not TerryK, so stop damn well acting like him. --Leda 10:55, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

Hi

Just pointing out, you accidentally blocked Leda for a month instead of a day. Wandering 16:39, 15 June 2008 (EDT)